Pages

Thursday, December 12, 2013

The Total Make-over of Jesus Christ

I recently saw a brief debate on line, from
the show “Totally Biased With W. Kamau Bell”, featuring a debate about the
existence of God.The debate paired two
stand-up comedians, Jamie Kilstein (arguing for atheism) and John Fugelsang
(arguing for theism and belief in Jesus).Although lacking in intellectual punch, the debate was good-tempered and
funny in spots, as you might expect when it is arranged for two stand-up
comedians to debate an issue.John
Fugelsang, a “Jesus believer”, must have had an interesting upbringing, since
he described himself as “from an abnormally Christian background”, since he was
the son of an ex-nun and a Franciscan brother.Perhaps not surprisingly John was more keen on Jesus than he was on His
Church. Or, in his words, “I view Jesus
much the way I view Elvis:I love the
guy, but a lot of the fan-clubs really freak me out”.In fact Mr. Fugelsang’s defence of Christian
theism involved a not-so-subtle denunciation of the Church as a way of distancing
the figure of Jesus from the actions of others done in His Name.It is a common-place in apologetics to admit
that much that is done in Jesus’ Name and under the Christian banner has been
appalling and is in no way expressive of authentic Christianity.But as Mr. Fugelsang continued his rapid-fire
apologia for Jesus, it was apparent
that the Son of God had undergone a rather dramatic and extreme make-over.

When
John hit his stride, he asserted that the “fundamentalist Christians” (left unidentified,
and cowering in the shadows) overlook “the fact that Jesus was pretty much the
most extremely liberal guy ever, in history”.By liberal, our apologist meant that Jesus “scares the hell of the
conservative, even today” because He was a “peaceful, radical, non-violent
revolutionary who hung out with lepers, hookers, and crooks…[He was]
anti-wealth, anti-death penalty, anti-public prayer…never anti-gay, never
anti-abortion, never anti-premarital
sex…a homeless, Middle-eastern, Jew!”It
was quite a performance.I wish I could
preach like that.People were
impressed.Even Mr. Kilstein admitted
that he would like to hang out with someone like that Jesus.

The
problem is that the Jesus proclaimed by Brother John has undergone such an
extreme and total make-over that He is hard to recognize as the One we read
about in the Bible.I grant John’s point
that many people in the American religious right have co-opted Jesus for some
of their causes in a way that is not appropriate, and that it is at least
possible that Jesus might not bless every single right-wing position.But the irony is that Mr. Fugelsang is doing
the exact same thing in the service of the left-wing.Where, the Bible-expositor in me asks, did
Jesus say anything about the death penalty, or public liturgical prayer?Where did he talk about homosexuality or
abortion or pre-marital sex in such a way that one could conclude that He was
“never anti-gay, never anti-abortion, never anti-premarital sex”?—though
concerning this last, we might conclude that since He condemned looking
lustfully at a woman (Mt. 5:28) we might expect Him to be decisively
unenthusiastic about pre-marital sex.In
fact Brother John has re-cast the Biblical Jesus to conform to the Jesus he
would like to have, one who supports the left-wing causes so dear to him and to
liberals generally.

It
is an old strategy.It seems that
everyone who hates the Church loves its Founder, and everyone wants Jesus on
their side.Thus the Communists hailed
Jesus as the first Communist, and the Nazis hailed Him as the first National
Socialist (and an Aryan at that).In
this venerable Search for the Historical Jesus, everyone re-makes the Lord into
whatever suits their current fancy, by both suppressing some parts of His
teaching and blowing up and intensifying other parts.And of course all players in this game assume
without argument that the historical Church is out to lunch, and has of course misunderstood and distorted
the true Jesus.Thus one can make a
Jewish Jesus, a Muslim Jesus, and now a Liberal Jesus.If one is desperate enough for attention and
book sales, one can even make a Zealot Jesus.

I
would suggest that the method whereby Jesus is made over is fundamentally
flawed.That is, one should not airily
assume that the movement which He created and the men who wrote down His words
and preserved them without a break for two millennia have nothing to say about
what Jesus was actually like.The
cavalier dismissal of the first and second century Church is a little weird,
when you think about it.At the very least
one could conclude that if the apostles who actually knew and wrote about Jesus
could not understand Him, then it is unlikely that we can understand Him two
thousand years later simply by reading their (supposedly) flawed apostolic
memoirs.If the first century apostolic
Church could not “get it”, there really is no hope for anyone else getting
it.But as it is, there is no reason to
think that the men who spent time with Jesus day in and day out, who were
trained by Him and entrusted by Him with His mission and message, were
incapable of “getting it”.It does not
take a great deal of faith to conclude that the apostles were able to preserve
an authentic picture of Him, for after all, they were with Him for quite a
while.I would rather therefore trust
the Church’s consistent and two-thousand year old picture of Jesus, than trust
the most recent make-over.Mr. Fugelsang
may be a great comedian.But here I find
that it is his portrayal of Jesus that is the most funny.

Fr. Lawrence on Ancient Faith:

BUY the book

Fr. L. at oca.org

Followers

Father Lawrence Farley holds an M.Div.from Wycliffe College, Toronto School of Theology, and also completed a Certificate program at St. Tikhon's Seminary.

Since 1987 he has served as the pastor of St. Herman's Orthodox Church, OCA (Archdiocese of Canada) in Langley BC. Several priests, deacons, and lay members of new missions have emerged from the membership of St. Herman's.